Supposedly thrift is the style now, says the NYT, quoting some wife of a Cincinnati plastic surgeon who has taken to borrowing DVDs from the library and growing her own vegetables, blah blah blah.

Maybe times are hard for plastic surgeons, though. If there's one thing people with real financial troubles can skimp on, it's plastic surgery.

In San Francisco, Cooper Marcus, 36, has started choosing recipes based on the ingredients on sale at the market. Mr. Marcus canceled the family’s subscription to Netflix, his premium cable package and a wine club membership. He uses a program on his iPhone to find the cheapest gas and drives out of his way to save 50 cents per gallon.

I guess greenness isn't the style anymore or Marcus would be ashamed to say he was driving a lot more just to save some money.

Kellee Sikes, 37, a consultant in Kirkwood, Mo., no longer uses paper napkins. Ms. Sikes uses organic cloth ones until they get threadbare and then uses them as cleaning rags.

Oh, bullshit. It takes years for cloth napkins to reach the rag stage. They do make great rags, though, but this napkins-to-rags stuff doesn't fit the trend story. Unless that "organic" cloth is really crappy, in which case, it's not to frugal to buy it.

When they are no longer useful, she puts them in the in-ground waste composter in the backyard. She plans to start burying her dogs’ feces there, which saves on the cost of sending refuse to a landfill.

Oh, now they've deteriorated to the point where they are not even usable as rags? Spare me. And TMI about the dog shit.

“I recently heard a phrase: ‘Never waste a crisis,’ ” Ms. Sikes said. “I love it. This is a chance for us to re-examine what’s important.”

Never waste a crisis... Yeah, somebody said that recently. But it sure as hell wasn't about resisting spending money.

April 10, 2009

Defending the privilege in her brief to the court, Assistant Attorney General Jennifer Sloan Lattis asserted that the privilege is justifiable because it is an “undisputed fact that only Wisconsin law schools systematically instruct in Wisconsin law.” Brief of Defendants-Appellees, at 35.

However, Judge Richard Posner immediately pounced on the assertion as being unsupported by the record....

Stating that he doubted there is any Wisconsin content taught in Wisconsin law schools, Posner observed, “They use standard casebooks, which are national.”

Later, he called the contention that there is such content “a complete fiction,” and bluntly said, “I don’t believe you. I don’t believe the courses are any different from those in Indiana or Illinois.”

Judge Diane Wood also said, “It is totally fictional that students learn Wisconsin law at Marquette or Wisconsin any more than they would learn in North Dakota or Oklahoma.”

Posner even questioned whether the privilege could be upheld, assuming it could survive a commerce clause challenge, suggesting that it could be struck down on equal protection grounds as “completely arbitrary.”

Wood and Posner also both challenged the state’s defense that the burdens of taking the bar exam are too “incidental” to violate the commerce clause.

... Anthony Ciolli, a University of Pennsylvania Law School graduate and former chief education director at AutoAdmit, can press ahead with his lawsuit against Stanford Law School professor Mark Lemley, who worked as counsel at San Francisco-based Keker & Van Nest, two Yale Law School students and others.

Ciolli's lawsuit claims that he was wrongly included as a defendant in a case brought in June 2007 by the two law students, who alleged that AutoAdmit defamed them on its discussion board. He also claims that Boston-based Edwards Angell Palmer & Dodge rescinded its offer of full-time employment because of the alleged connection between him and the statements about the women.....

Named as defendants in his suit are Heide Iravani and Brittan Heller, the former Yale law students; and ReputationDefender, a public relations firm that represented the students. Also named are Lemley; Keker & Van Nest; the Los Angeles-based law firm Rosen & Associates; and attorney David Rosen. Lemley and Rosen were attorneys for the students.

Ciolli's lawsuit alleges wrongful initiation of civil proceedings, abuse of process, libel, slander, false-light invasion of privacy, tortious interference with contract and unauthorized use of name or likeness.

"You should not exaggerate and lie like this when you are the vice president of the United States," said Karl Rove. Funnily, the headlines say Rove called Biden a liar. And really, I guess he did... if he was being unkind.

"Have you ever heard of insect politics? Neither have I! Insects don't have politics.... they're very brutal. No compassion.... no compromise. We can't trust the insect. I'd like to become the first insect politician. I'd like to, but.... I'm an insect.... who dreamed he was a man, and loved it. But now the dream is over, and the insect is awake."

In 1977, at a restaurant in Manhattan, Mr. Wrangler met [Margaret] Whiting, who was famous for hits like “That Old Black Magic” and “Moonlight in Vermont." Although she was 22 years older, they bonded.

“They lived together for about 20 years before they got married in 1994,” Mr. Schwarz said. “Their relationship had nothing to do with sexual orientation; it was based on mutual affection and respect.” Ms. Whiting survives him.

I've spent 10 minutes looking — rather unsuccessfully — for the right Margaret Whiting clip to embed. I should be looking for Jack Wrangler!

Here's the — pretty clean but NSFW — trailer for "Anatomy of an Icon," the documentary about him.

"... and traditional legal thinkers are likely to say that if legalism (legal formalism, orthodox legal reasoning, a 'government of laws not men,' the 'rule of law' ... and so forth) does not exist everything is permitted to judges — so watch out!"

Aw, leave Michael Phelps alone! What's wrong with drinking in a club? If you go out dancing, why not dance like "a loon"? Let him drink from a bottle of Grey Loon and dance like a goose if he wants. What business is it of yours?

[T]he athlete skeeved out onlookers when he persisted in PDA-ing with his girlfriend, cocktail waitress Caroline (Caz) Pal.

"They wouldn't stop making out! They were literally sucking face, and not caring that anyone was watching," says our snitch, who added that Phelps danced up such a storm that he briefly went shirtless, changing out of his T-shirt in the club and putting on a zip-up hoodie with nothing underneath.

Literally sucking face, eh? Who are these people who go to clubs and are nevertheless susceptible to the skeeves?

You know my position on public display of affection:

So just yell — good-naturedly — "Get a room!" and go find a love of your own. Or sublimate usefully.

IN THE COMMENTS: Mr. Forward has a poem:

Swims like a fishDances like a loonDrinks Grey GooseSings off tuneAffection in PublicIsn't so wrong At least he wasn'tKissing his bong.

Retired U.S. Ambassador Robert Oakley, who was special envoy to Somalia in the 1990s, said U.S. special operations forces have drawn up detailed plans to attack piracy groups where they live on land, but are awaiting orders from the Obama national security team....

The veteran diplomat, who also was ambassador to Pakistan, said teams of Army Delta Force or Navy SEALs "could take care of the pirates in 72 hours" if given the order to strike.

"They have plans on the table but are waiting for the green light," Oakley said.

So say Trey Parker and Matt Stone, about their movie "South Park: Bigger, Longer And Uncut" (which depicts Saddam as Satan's gay lover.) They also say they received an autographed photograph of the overthrown dictator.

Phillip Alpert found out the hard way. He had just turned 18 when he sent a naked photo of his 16-year-old girlfriend, a photo she had taken and sent him, to dozens of her friends and family after an argument. The high school sweethearts had been dating for almost 2½ years. "It was a stupid thing I did because I was upset and tired and it was the middle of the night and I was an immature kid," says Alpert.

Orlando, Florida, police didn't see it that way. Alpert was arrested and charged with sending child pornography, a felony to which he pleaded no contest but was later convicted. He was sentenced to five years probation and required by Florida law to register as a sex offender.

"You will find me on the registered sex offender list next to people who have raped children, molested kids, things like that, because I sent child pornography," says Alpert in disbelief, explaining, "You think child pornography, you think 6-year-old, 3-year-old little kids who can't think for themselves, who are taken advantage of. That really wasn't the case."

I was listening to the beginning of the Rush Limbaugh show as I was cooking lunch this morning, and he was going on about the U.S. crew that was taken hostage by pirates off the cost of Somalia today. He'd slotted the story into his Obama-doesn't-know-what-to-do template and was riffing away about Obama's indecision and what he must be fretting about and how he'd probably want to apologize to the pirates and so forth. The big show was steaming along. (I thought a good ending would be: hostage crisis... it's Jimmy Carter all over again.)

And then he was slipped the news that the U.S. crew had taken their ship back, defeated the pirates. And Rush should have turned that big show around instantly. It should have been: Yay, America! Americans don't lie back and wait to be rescued. We're ready to fight. We're self-reliant. The government isn't the answer to everything. There were lots of great alternate Rush Limbaugh templates to mobilize right then. This is why we need to have our own guns. This is why the bitching about Bush after Katrina was all wrong. Etc. etc.

But Rush couldn't turn that big show — that big container ship — around. He couldn't let go of Obama doesn't know what to do, and I felt a little sad about my radio hero.

Come on, Rush, be agile! I thought you knew how to do that. Eh, enough about Rush, I want to celebrate the American crew. Go America. And to the rest of the world: Look on and admire. Learn something.

When I first read that, I missed the comma after "tinkering." Tinkering law professors! The worst!

So... anyway... this is a column by Jennifer Jacobs in the Des Moines Register dealing with the aftermath of the state court decision finding a state constitutional law right to same-sex marriage. Iowa voters have the power to call for a constitutional convention, where various constitutional amendments would be proposed and, if adopted, would be submitted, separately, to the voters for ratification.

A constitutional convention is a heady thought for Iowans who see that as a possible way to put the brakes on gay marriage in Iowa.

“I’m inclined to hope they succeed, if that’s their strategy,” said Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal, who has saluted Friday’s Iowa Supreme Court ruling legalizing gay marriage. “There’s a lot of good, progressive issues that we could pursue: a woman’s right to choose, guaranteed health care for all Iowa citizens, workers’ rights — so if there are people that want to help us get to a constitutional convention, that’s kind of my dream world.”...

Anything and everything – conservative issues, liberal issues – could eventually come to pass after such a convention, Iowa lawmakers and constitutional scholars pointed out.

“It’s truly a wild card — or a trump card, depending on how you look at it,” said Sen. Merlin Bartz, R-Grafton.

Drake Law School professor Mark Kende said: “Politically, Iowa has moved a little bit left. One concern might be if you’re on the right and you want to get rid of the gay marriage decision, but the state is moving left, what are you opening up? On the other hand, there’s a tradition of more effective campaigns on the right. Even if you’re fewer in number, the right can be more passionate and vocal and organized.”

There hasn't been a constitutional convention in Iowa since 1857. What would it be like today to put everything up for grabs?

Conventions were more popular early in the nation’s history, said Todd Pettys, a law professor at the University of Iowa.

“We’re a lot more cautious about it now,” Pettys said. “People say, 'Who knows what these people are going to cook up and what if it catches fire briefly and we sort of drive ourselves off a cliff?’”

You may think you'll get the one thing you want, but there will be fights over other things, and who knows where the people will end up when they are asked to inscribe all sorts of new rights into the state's highest law? Do you think the conservative arguments — for cutting out rights that the state courts have found — will do better than the liberal arguments — for giving the courts new texts to expound?

It would be fascinating to watch one state's people struggling to decide what they want in their constitution. Will they understand that the question is how much power they want for their courts and how much they want to keep for their own democratic choice? You don't get to vote on the constitution too often. It's a democratic choice to deprive yourself of democratic choice — if you make new rights — or to get it back — if you withdraw rights.

Liberalism... has been reduced to an elitist set of rhetorical formulas, which posit the working class as passive, mindless victims in desperate need of salvation by the state. Individual rights and free expression, which used to be liberal values, are being gradually subsumed to worship of government power...

...Liberalism has gradually sunk into a soft, soggy, white upper-middle-class style that I often find preposterous and repellent. The nut cases on the right are on the uneducated fringe, but on the left they sport Ivy League degrees.... It's a comfortable, urban, messianic liberalism befogged by psychiatric pharmaceuticals. Conservatives these days are more geared to facts than emotions, and as individuals they seem to have a more ethical, perhaps sports-based sense of fair play.

***

Paglia's point aligns with something Justice Scalia often says. Here's a passage from a case we talked about in my Conlaw2 class yesterday:

The virtue of a democratic system with a First Amendment is that it readily enables the people, over time, to be persuaded that what they took for granted is not so, and to change their laws accordingly. That system is destroyed if the smug assurances of each age are removed from the democratic process and written into the Constitution. So to counterbalance the Court's criticism of our ancestors, let me say a word in their praise: they left us free to change. The same cannot be said of this most illiberal Court, which has embarked on a course of inscribing one after another of the current preferences of the society (and in some cases only the counter majoritarian preferences of the society's law trained elite) into our Basic Law.

I am sure you must have received tons of emails recently, after your blogger love story was published in the New York Times last week. I read the text, too and I could not help but smile.

Me and my boyfriend met on a blog, too. We both blogged for one of the Czech dailies and one day, an admiring comment appeared below one of my texts. I knew who the author was - a co-blogger. He kept returning and leaving more and more comments. I thought at first he was just kidding me – so exaggerated it seemed to me at first...To make the story short: we started sending private messages to each other and chatting on ICQ. We found out we had many things in common and I thought I found my (male) alter ego. We decided to meet in the end, which was not that easy as each of us lives in a different part of the country, about 3.5 hours on the train away. We have been together since. :-)

We decided to publish our love story on the blog about a month after our first date and just like in your and Meade’s case, we received a lot of supportive and surprised comments – our readers suspected something (my boyfriend left lots of hints in his blogs) but could not make the link between us. It was fun to observe....

I think it is rather funny that your story was published on 3 April - that is exactly 11 months after me and my boyfriend met in person for the first time. Although we have not announced anything officially, I’ve received a ring from him and plan to move to the city where he lives in autumn.

It's my dear hope that endless numbers of bloggers and commenters will read and write their way to love.

Don't forget the key step: email. You can love the blogger/commenter to the depth of your heart, but at some point, you need to show up in person and see if the physical presence aligns with what you think you love. To make that happen send email.

"The notion that somehow civil justice is hurting business in the state is just totally unfounded," said UW law professor emeritus Marc Galanter....

Galanter said one intent of the report was to look at what he called the "consistent drumbeat" put forth by Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce... that claimed excessive litigation was hurting the state's business climate.

A Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce spokesman responds:

"It should come as a surprise to no one that the UW Law School is trying to say that we don't have enough litigation in Wisconsin... They have a vested interest in trying to graduate as many future lawyers as they can accommodate. So they have an interest in expressing that point of view."

"'Mr. Brando, would you please do us the honor of reading the next passage from the Haggada?' he asked. Marlon replied, 'It would be my pleasure.'"

Brando rose and delivered the passage "as if he were reading Shakespeare on Broadway. Mouths fell open and eyes focused on the speaker with an intensity any rabbi would covet. When he was done, I think people actually paused, wondering if they should applaud."

Next... the rabbi approached another member of our table: "Mr. Dylan, would you do us the honor of singing us a song?"

I'm just seeing this story. Strange how one can be in a city and have no idea some strange possibly terrorist madness is going on around you.

ADDED: When I was considering buying a condo, I wanted a particular one that looked out directly onto the state capitol building, and I thought about how it could be a terrorist target. I also thought about how it might not be good for the mind to have the government looming so conspicuously and constantly in view.

Working on an old computer yesterday, I happened across the first email I sent after starting my blog (on January 14, 2004).

Just before that I fretted:

I think a problem with professional [blogs] & humor is that you have to be concerned about your reputation too much. I'd like to do one, but also worry about mixing the personal with the professional (in front of the whole world!).

And, hearing of a quirky blog written by a sociology professor, I said:

It is exactly the sort of thing I'd love to do, but I'm too chicken to do it.

I felt that starting to blog was pretty far out of reach for me, but then, an hour later, I just did it.

I suspect Frank would like to soften us up for future judicial nominations. Back in 2007, Barack Obama told us about "the criteria by which I'm going to be selecting my judges": "We need somebody who's got the heart, the empathy, to recognize what it's like to be a young teenage mom. The empathy to understand what it's like to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled or old."

If Obama delivers nominees who've demonstrated their heart and empathy by reaching outcomes that accord with liberal political preferences, will liberals forget that we need to test the soundness of their legal reasoning? If Frank succeeds in getting people to believe that judicial opinions are the kind wishes of good hearts, we will rubber-stamp these seemingly good people.

If we do that, we will have forgotten what law is, and our rights will depend on the continued beneficence of the judges we've empowered.

IN THE EMAIL: "You are a radical and a rascal and you should be on the Bill O'Reilly show."

For some reason, I read that as: Should I stay with my girlfriend after she gave up religion for sex?

I thought that was a more interesting question!

IN THE COMMENTS: Paddy O. said:

"I wonder how many married men would have agreed to marry their wives if she told him in advance that she would never, ever have sex with him, even after they were married."

I would have. I would have been heartily disappointed in some ways but the chance to spend my life with my wife far outweighs the delights of sex.

That's how much I love her. I would be willing to give up even that. Sometimes that's not always a choice. If there was an accident, or something happened that physically prevented sex, that would in no way mean I'd see the relationship as over. It would just mean living the life as it was handed to me, and being the better person for walking with her throughout my life.

As far as the article goes, of course he should break up with her. Unless he's on the same page spiritually they will run into problems no matter what. Good for her that she's taking a step to find more wholeness and inner peace, and it'll be better for her to get away from this guy and find someone who is a much better match.

First off, his mother was a Kansas girl. Never lived in Kansas though, but with deep roots. You know, like Kansas bloody Kansas. John Brown the insurrectionist. Jesse James and Quantrill. Bushwhackers, Guerillas. Wizard of Oz Kansas. I think Barack has Jefferson Davis back there in his ancestry someplace. And then his father. An African intellectual. Bantu, Masai, Griot type heritage - cattle raiders, lion killers. I mean it’s just so incongruous that these two people would meet and fall in love. You kind of get past that though. And then you’re into his story. Like an odyssey except in reverse.

BF: In what way?

BD: First of all, Barack is born in Hawaii. Most of us think of Hawaii as paradise – so I guess you could say that he was born in paradise....

BF: What in his book would make you think he’d be a good politician?

BD: Well nothing really....

BF: Do you think he’ll make a good president?

BD: I have no idea. He’ll be the best president he can be. Most of those guys come into office with the best of intentions and leave as beaten men. Johnson would be a good example of that … Nixon, Clinton in a way, Truman, all the rest of them going back. You know, it’s like they all fly too close to the sun and get burned.